Gay blood donors?

[Celeste]

This thread has put me into despair.

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/1...toshikiii1.jpg

[Aerides]

Another question on the US blood test is:

"Have you spent more than 6 months in the UK since 1980?"

Mad Cow GTFO brits your blood is no good.
Since I moved to the US in 1982 I'm banned from giving here.

[Woozie]

Another question on the US blood test is:

"Have you spent more than 6 months in the UK since 1980?"

Mad Cow GTFO brits your blood is no good.
Since I moved to the US in 1982 I'm banned from giving here.

We Americans are stupid enough already. We don't need people like you turning our brains into sponges.

[Dimmauk]

Brits have bad brains.

[toonces]

I think that's retarded. Its not like they don't test the blood before pumping it in someone.

Tell that to canada. They suck at it

[Nirokun!]

Another question on the US blood test is:

"Have you spent more than 6 months in the UK since 1980?"

Mad Cow GTFO brits your blood is no good.
Since I moved to the US in 1982 I'm banned from giving here.

I can still give blood and you~ cant~

Nana~nana~boo-boo! (stick your head in doo-doo)

When I'm oversexed, i'll be happy not to donate my O-, and i'm not giving it now because of a combination of laziness (always) and political reasons. I dont want that cookie and juice that much

[Woozie]

I can still give blood and you~ cant~

Nana~nana~boo-boo! (stick your head in doo-doo)

When I'm oversexed, i'll be happy not to donate my O-, and i'm not giving it now because of a combination of laziness (always) and political reasons. I dont want that cookie and juice that much

Don't let the redcross find out that you're O-. Seriously. They call me every freakin day and mail me letters every week and just wont leave me alone. I'm sure they'll want you more than me because I'm O+

[Nirokun!]

just tell them you had sex with a dude and you're set :D

[Tour]

the risk factor isn't anal sex, it's gay anal sex. gay men are oversexed since male sex drives are feeding off of male sex drives, and they're more likely to transmit HIV since I would imagine the lack of an imperative to prevent an unplanned pregnancy makes it less likely for them to wear a condom

the blood bank screening makes no mention of lesbians, the questions are specifically "have you ever had sex with a man who had sex with another man" for women and "have you ever had sex with a man, even once" for men.


two of the questions are "were you born in africa" and "have you ever had sex with someone born in africa"

unless the statistic quoted is limited to the US, I'd say they're addressing that risk

As he pointed out, heterosexual sex has a significantly higher risk of transmitting HIV than lesbian sex. Men in general are oversexed, since male sex drives are present in heterosexual relationships, they're inherently more risky. Clearly only lesbians should be allowed to give blood.

[Correction]

It's because men are pigs, and they don't want pigs blood.

Shit! It's a Zionist Conspiracy! To the Elvismobile!

[fantasticdan]

As he pointed out, heterosexual sex has a significantly higher risk of transmitting HIV than lesbian sex. Men in general are oversexed, since male sex drives are present in heterosexual relationships, they're inherently more risky. Clearly only lesbians should be allowed to give blood.

It's not as much about the amount of sex guys have, as it is the number of different partners. And on top of the fact that anal sex is a much higher rate of HIV transmission, gay guys tend to have anal sex both ways. You can try to argue with words for the sake of equality or political correctness all you want, but the numbers are what they are.

[Kuya]

the risk factor isn't anal sex, it's gay anal sex. gay men are oversexed since male sex drives are feeding off of male sex drives, and they're more likely to transmit HIV since I would imagine the lack of an imperative to prevent an unplanned pregnancy makes it less likely for them to wear a condom

Priran is not completely wrong, but it still does not justify why, even if a certain group were more sexually active, they would not just ask if you've had anal sex, seeing as how that's one of the most important factors in HIV transmission. Gay anal sex (male), even if more constant, still involves anal sex, which should be the main question to be asked, not if they've slept with men. If they want to be so careful about this, why in the world don't they just exclude anyone who's been involved in anal penetration? They seem to be okay with sweepingly disqualifying men who've slept with men, mind as well go straight for the method of transmission to be even safer.

Saying that "promiscuity" is a risk factor without considering that regardless of how many times you have sex, anal penetration is still much more likely to transmit HIV than vaginal penetration, furthermore, the statistics on whether promiscuity is a risk factor have had conflicting results.

[fantasticdan]

Priran is not completely wrong, but it still does not justify why, even if a certain group were more sexually active, they would not just ask if you've had anal sex, seeing as how that's one of the most important factors in HIV transmission. Gay anal sex (male), even if more constant, still involves anal sex, which should be the main question to be asked, not if they've slept with men.

Saying that "promiscuity" is a risk factor without considering that regardless of how many times you have sex, anal penetration is still much more likely to transmit HIV than vaginal penetration, furthermore, the statistics on whether promiscuity is a risk factor have had conflicting results.

There's a big difference between people who have anal sex both ways as their primary form of sex, with on average a much higher number of partners, compared to guys who maybe stuck it in a couple girls butts a few times. The fact that the HIV rate among gays is already as high as it is, also means gays are FAR more likely to contract HIV per partner.

[Kuya]

And why not just outright keep people who engage in anal sex from donating, just to be safe? Seeing as how anal sex still, whether heterosexual or homosexual relationship, has a higher rate of transmission than vaginal sex. With that, you get to keep those in homosexual relationships with alleged higher rates of infection out, as well as the evidently higher rate of infection that people who engage in anal sex in heterosexual relationships contract, as opposed to strictly other less risky forms of "sex".

[fantasticdan]

And why not just outright keep people who engage in anal sex from donating, just to be safe? Seeing as how anal sex still, whether heterosexual or homosexual relationship, has a higher rate of transmission than vaginal sex. With that, you get to keep those in homosexual relationships with alleged higher rates of infection out, as well as the evidently higher rate of infection that people who engage in anal sex in heterosexual relationships contract, as opposed to strictly other less risky forms of "sex".

You mean take away a huge amount of blood from people that need it, for the sake of being politically correct? Good plan.

[Kuya]

You mean to be safer? Unless safety isn't the only reason why we're discriminating.

The fact that the HIV rate among gays is already as high as it is, also means gays are FAR more likely to contract HIV per partner.

You mean, because gays tend to engage in unprotected (i don't have data on whether this is true or not) anal sex with multiple partners, they may be at a higher risk, and that's why the phrase "men who've slept with other men at some point in time" is used to discriminate? As opposed to men who've slept with *insert number of men here* or who've slept with a man who's slept with *insert number of men here* without protection? It seems to me like, considering the research that shows that the argument that promiscuity leads to more HIV transmission is not true depending on the socioeconomic factors and region of residence, they must not care very much for keeping possible safe candidates for blood donations.

[fantasticdan]

You mean to be safer? Unless safety isn't the only reason why we're discriminating.

To reiterate my previous post, the two aren't even comparable in terms of HIV transmission rates. Judging by the HIV rate difference between straight women and gay men, a gay guy is at least 10 times more likely to contract per anal sex session/partner than a straight guy, ignoring the whole both ways thing. Combine this with the fact that a straight guy on average has less sex partners overall, and for those that have had anal sex, will likely only have had it with a fraction of those partners, and even than, only as a small fraction of the sex they have with those partners.

[Kuya]

By the way, do you have any evidence that people who've engaged in anal sex in heterosexual relationships compose a huge amount of people who donate blood? I've heard that the number is quite small, about as small as the number of people who engage in homosexual relations and anal sex. Oh well.

Combine this with the fact that a straight guy on average has less sex partners overall, and for those that have had anal sex, will likely only have had it with a fraction of those partners, and even than, only as a small fraction of the sex they have with those partners.

So in other words, we aren't loosing a very big number of men who've engaged in heterosexual relationships with anal sex involved.

Judging by the HIV rate difference between straight women and gay men, a gay guy is at least 10 times more likely to contract per anal sex session/partner than a straight guy, ignoring the whole both ways thing.

Do you know the difference in rates, between men who assume the penetrator role, and those who assume the role of penetrated? You'd be surprised with the difference, that is, without taking into account whether they used protection or not, which apparently is not a factor that is considered.

[EternityEnd]

Combine this with the fact that a straight guy on average has less sex partners overall

I'm sorry, now you're just reaching. Are you talking about internet straight guys, or real straight guys? Let's be honest here, straight men are huge sluts. Your statistic samples seem to be taken at Churches and gay porn sets.

[fantasticdan]

You mean, because gays tend to engage in unprotected (i don't have data on whether this is true or not) anal sex with multiple partners, they may be at a higher risk, and that's why the phrase "men who've slept with other men at some point in time" is used to discriminate? As opposed to men who've slept with *insert number of men here* or who've slept with a man who's slept with *insert number of men here* without protection? It seems to me like, considering the research that shows that the argument that promiscuity leads to more HIV transmission is not true depending on the socioeconomic factors and region of residence, they must not care very much for keeping possible safe candidates for blood donations.

No, I mean because the HIV rate among gay men is literally between 12-20% depending on the studies you look at.

By the way, do you have any evidence that people who've engaged in anal sex in heterosexual relationships compose a huge amount of people who donate blood? I've heard that the number is quite small, about as small as the number of people who engage in homosexual relations and anal sex. Oh well.

Of coarse I doubt there are studies on the relationship between hetero anal sex and blood donations, but the statistics/polls I can find in a quick google imply 20-25% or more of straight men and women have had anal sex at least once. To my knowledge, the gay male population is estimated to be around 3-4%.